This week Apple and clone Mac maker Psystar both asked for a summary judgment in their ongoing lawsuit before the trial can officially start in January 2010.

On Thursday, both Apple and Psystar filed separate motions, with their respective supporting evidence, requesting a summary judgment from Judge William Alsup in a San Francisco court. Two hearings have been set for Nov. 12, and the outcome could determine whether the trial will take place in January.

Apple has requested that Alsup rule that Psystar infringed on its copyrights and violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in its sale of unofficial third-party machines running Mac OS X. Apple has asserted that Psystar's circumvention of its disc protection methods for its operating system is in violation of the law.

Meanwhile, Psystar has asked the judge to consider a list of evidence submitted in its own request for a summary judgment. The evidence includes the end user license agreements for both Mac OS X 10.5 and Mac OS X 10.6, as well as excerpts from depositions from numerous Apple executives, including Senior Vice President of Worldwide Produt Marketing Phil Schiller.

It was Schiller that Psystar previously alleged was unprepared for his testimony. Apple responded that the proceedings were just an "effort to harass" one of the company's senior executives.

Last week, a member of the Psystar defense team withdrew himself from the case. And in July, the Florida-based corporation brought on a new legal team after it emerged from bankruptcy.

The company -- which sells machines with Snow Leopard, Apple's latest operating system, preinstalled -- made a bold move earlier this week, when it announced it will license its virtualization technology to third-party hardware vendors. The Psystar OEM Licensing Program intends to allow Intel machines made by companies other than Apple to run Mac OS X 10.6.

hold up. Psystar is trying, after failing with Leopard, to get a summary judgement that Apple tying Snow Leopard to their own hardware and only their hardware is a violation of anti-trust on the grounds that Schiller wasn't prepared to answer questions that had nothing to do with the actual issue at hand.

if that is all they have, I have a feeling that this is all Psystar will get out of the Judge

I do not know about you but before i bought my iMac i would have loved to install MAC-OSX on my home pc (actually i did but it did not work as expected... )
Anyway what i want to say is that i think that people should be provided with more options... I never understood why on earth doesn't Apple do something about the OSX so that it can be installed on a regular PC...
If someone wants fancy they can go with Apple products if you are looking only for a good OS than you take only the OSX.

I do not know about you but before i bought my iMac i would have loved to install MAC-OSX on my home pc (actually i did but it did not work as expected... )
Anyway what i want to say is that i think that people should be provided with more options... I never understood why on earth doesn't Apple do something about the OSX so that it can be installed on a regular PC...
If someone wants fancy they can go with Apple products if you are looking only for a good OS than you take only the OSX.

just my 2 cent

You DO have options. They're called "Wndows, Linux, and OSX". Why is this concept so hard for people to grasp?!

You don't hear about people complaining that their XBOX's wanting to run PS3 games do you? Gee, why can't I load just the iPhone O/S on an Android phone?

First, maybe because Apple makes very little money on selling OSX. It is a hardware company and adds value to it's hardware by offering an integrated unique operating experience.

By licensing the OS, as Apple did in the 90's, it would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Microsoft makes money on selling it's operating system because it is pre installed on virtually every computer sold that isn't a Mac. All the hardware companies pay big bucks to Microsoft. This compensates from the large amount of piracy going on.

A non-update version of Windows cost much more then an update version of OSX, which Apple doesn't offer. Further, by offering OSX to everybody it would have to take on support cost for other manufacturers' hardware.

Second, why in America, the land of the free, should Apple be forced to sell it's operating system in a manner that it doesn't want? The OS is clearly sold as an update for pre-existing Mac owners. That is no secret. It is priced as such. Accordingly, consumers are free to accept what Apple offers or buy something else from Dell or the likes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thewolfro

I do not know about you but before i bought my iMac i would have loved to install MAC-OSX on my home pc (actually i did but it did not work as expected... )
Anyway what i want to say is that i think that people should be provided with more options... I never understood why on earth doesn't Apple do something about the OSX so that it can be installed on a regular PC...
If someone wants fancy they can go with Apple products if you are looking only for a good OS than you take only the OSX.

I do not know about you but before i bought my iMac i would have loved to install MAC-OSX on my home pc (actually i did but it did not work as expected... )
Anyway what i want to say is that i think that people should be provided with more options... I never understood why on earth doesn't Apple do something about the OSX so that it can be installed on a regular PC...
If someone wants fancy they can go with Apple products if you are looking only for a good OS than you take only the OSX.

just my 2 cent

The confusion lies in the belief that Apple is in the software business, it's not it's in the hardware business. To use their wonderful and inventive
hardware, you have to use their (OS) software to run it. DUHHH.

Part of the reason Apple is able to provide such a great OS is because they have tight control over the hardware on which it works. Broadening the range of hardware requires a lot more work and tweaks to ensure the OS will work bug-free on everything.

Also, Apple created OSX to sell Macs, not any old computer. They shouldn't be required to allow it to run on any PC just because they managed to create an outstanding OS that is the envy of the desktop computing world.

You may not like it but you know what? Saying OSX should be made to run on any standard PC is equivalent to saying a top brand auto manufacturer is required to make their technologies available to all other brands.

I don't know why this concept is so hard to grasp. There has always been Mac only (or more so, Windows only) software and nobody has ever considered suing these software developers because their software isn't available on both platforms.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thewolfro

I do not know about you but before i bought my iMac i would have loved to install MAC-OSX on my home pc (actually i did but it did not work as expected... )
Anyway what i want to say is that i think that people should be provided with more options... I never understood why on earth doesn't Apple do something about the OSX so that it can be installed on a regular PC...
If someone wants fancy they can go with Apple products if you are looking only for a good OS than you take only the OSX.

I do not know about you but before i bought my iMac i would have loved to install MAC-OSX on my home pc (actually i did but it did not work as expected... )
Anyway what i want to say is that i think that people should be provided with more options... I never understood why on earth doesn't Apple do something about the OSX so that it can be installed on a regular PC...
If someone wants fancy they can go with Apple products if you are looking only for a good OS than you take only the OSX.

just my 2 cent

Apple succeeds spectacularly with Macs and OS X precisely because it's a closed, controlled ecosystem. Anything else (or anything less), and OS X becomes a Windows clone. And who would want that? The whole reason behind Apple's business model when it comes to Macs (and their resulting success) is that OS X is tied to Apple's hardware. This is the reason customer satisfaction rates are so high, year after year. This is the reason the also-rans of the industry aspire to render their products more "Mac-like" in every way possible.

This "free OS X" notion lives and dies in small corners of the internet, and in the even smaller corners in which Apple fan sites live, fuelled mainly by the geek/tech-enthusiast minority that (wrongly) thinks it knows whats best for everyone else. In fact, Apple seems to know best. Period. Hackintoshes and mucking around with the OS and wailing about "freeing" it is alright for that small segment of Apple's user base (a segment which in the grand scheme of things is inconsequential anyway), but it would be a monumental disservice to the average user.

Apple succeeds because of these specific differentiations. It's a coveted business model that others only wish they could emulate successfully. We're at the point now, where if the average user has $1000+ to spend (and apparently, plenty of them do!) a Mac will be near or at the very top of their list. That's quite an accomplishment. It's the reason Ballmer ends up looking stupid, flustered, and tongue-tied at press conferences, especially when he's in a room-full of Macs.

Frankly, the last thing Apple's numbers, record Mac sales, and dominance of consumer mindshare and opinion would suggest is for Apple to free its OS. There's simply no demand for that and no reason to do so.

I do not know about you but before i bought my iMac i would have loved to install MAC-OSX on my home pc (actually i did but it did not work as expected... )
Anyway what i want to say is that i think that people should be provided with more options... I never understood why on earth doesn't Apple do something about the OSX so that it can be installed on a regular PC...
If someone wants fancy they can go with Apple products if you are looking only for a good OS than you take only the OSX.

just my 2 cent

Think of Halo 3. If Microsoft port it to PlayStation, it will most likely be the best selling game on both platform. But Microsoft rather you buy an Xbox if you want to play Halo 3 .

But unlike Apple, Microsoft loses (or make very little) on the sale of their hardware. But that's Microsoft for you.

The confusion lies in the belief that Apple is in the software business, it's not it's in the hardware business. To use their wonderful and inventive
hardware, you have to use their (OS) software to run it. DUHHH.

I think you guys are all missing the point. There are hundreds of thousands of people installing Mac OS X on non Apple hardware. You can go to numerous sites and get tutorials on how to install Leopard and Snow Leopard on various non Apple Hardware. There is a grass roots movement to install it then others willing to lend support.
I buy Apple products and have been for a very long time. I work in the IT industry and Windows keeps me employed but I love Mac OS X and install it on my home built computer that cost me about $800 to build and install Snow Leopard. I buy a separate license for each and every installation as well.
This home built computer would cost 3 to 4 THOUSAND dollars for a comparable MacPro.
I am very pro Apple and buy their products whenever I can. In my household we have 2 iPhone 3Gs and 3 Apple laptops. I am writing this on a unibody Macbook Pro. I love it!
All this discussion about installing Mac OS X on on non Apple harware reminds me of other platforms like VCRs first came out. The TV and movie industry tried to make it illegal to record movies. But the public won and we are all better for it. If the tv and movie industry won there would be no TiVo. The music industry tried to make illegal to record music onto a cassette! Remember those days?? They even tried to prevent people from owning a DVD recorder! But in all of these instances the public won. Eventually the public will win and Mac OS X will be installable and supported on non Apple hardware.
Apple is not going out and suing and shutting down the thousands of sites helping people install Mac OS X on their home computers. They know that the majority of peoeple that do that also buys regular Apple products.
I find it extremely interesting that so may here are against installing OS X on non Apple hardware.
Or are against Pystar selling computers with Mac OS X already installed.
It smacks of a elitism you only find with people willing to spend more money to keep themselves in a upper class minority so to speak.
Just think how the computing world be different id Microsoft or IBM had kept the early computer and operating systems platforms "closed". The computing world would be so different today!!!!
Well anyway that is just humble opinion!!!! You don't have to agree but you have to admitt I made some good points!!!
Geekdad

Tallest Skil:

"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse" "The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."

I find it extremely interesting that so may here are against installing OS X on non Apple hardware.
Or are against Pystar selling computers with Mac OS X already installed.
It smacks of a elitism you only find with people willing to spend more money to keep themselves in a upper class minority so to speak.
Geekdad

It isn't the hackintosh hobbyists that are the problem. It's those that want to do it while running a business behind it. The problem with the hackintosh-hobbyists, however, is they are encouraging it, while only thinking of themselves and their tinkering hobby. A lot of them give no consideration whatsoever to the wider market ramifications. In other words, they aren't thinking outside the basement.

The last thing anyone in their right mind would want is for OS X to become and open OS. Apple succeeds spectacularly with Macs and OS X precisely because it's a closed, controlled ecosystem. Anything else (or anything less), and OS X becomes a Windows clone. And who the hell would want that?? The whole reason behind Apple's business model when it comes to Macs (and their resulting success) is that OS X is tied to Apple's hardware. This is the reason customer satisfaction rates are so high, year after year. This is the reason the also-rans of the industry aspire to render their products more "Mac-like" in every way possible.

This "freely use computing hardware the way they want" notion lives and dies in small corners of the internet, and in the even smaller corners in which Apple fan sites live, fuelled mainly by the geek/tech-enthusiast minority that (wrongly) thinks it knows whats best for everyone else. In fact, Apple seems to know best. Period. Hackintoshes and mucking around with the OS and wailing about "freeing" it is alright for that small segment of Apple's user base (a segment which in the grand scheme of things is inconsequential anyway), but it would be a monumental disservice to the average user.

Apple succeeds because of these specific differentiations. It's a coveted business model that others only wish they could emulate successfully. We're at the point now, where if the average user has $1000+ to spend (and apparently, plenty of them do!) a Mac will be near or at the very top of their list. That's quite an accomplishment. It's the reason Ballmer ends up looking stupid, flustered, and tongue-tied at press conferences, especially when he's in a room-full of Macs.

And by the way, the last thing Apple's numbers, record Mac sales, and dominance of consumer mindshare and opinion would suggest is for Apple to free its OS. There's simply no demand for that and no reason to do so.

This "grass roots" hackintosh movement, isn't. It's a hobby that is confined to obscure corners of the internet, mostly on Mac fansites. So we're talking a minority of a minority, that in no way, shape or form represents the market at large, and it never will, because it is fundamentally at odds with the whole premise of Macs + OS X - a premise which is coveted by the entire industry and which is universally attractive to consumers.

[QUOTE=Quadra
This "grass roots" hackintosh movement, isn't. It's a hobby that is confined to obscure corners of the internet, mostly on Mac fansites. So we're talking a minority of a minority, that in no way, shape or form represents the market at large, and it never will, because it is fundamentally at odds with the whole premise of Macs + OS X - a premise which is coveted by the entire industry and which is universally attractive to consumers.[/QUOTE]

This is where I think you are wrong. The Hackintosh movement is not obscure or a minority anymore. It growing by leaps and bounds. Google it and you will find tons of how to articles and websites where people are willing to help you install OS X. This has not gone un noticed by Apple. The are not going after those websites and individuals. I have done consulting for Apple and I have talked to some lower level managers and they know all about the hackintosh movement and even do it themselves! There are definite gaps in product offerings that Apple know exists. Can you imagine a mid tower desktop not quite a Mac Pro but definitely not an iMac!
Also as Apple's market share grows they will have the some of the same problems that Window PCS have. There will be more viruses attacking OS X. The uniqueness will wear off as well with the brand name. Already Apple is having trouble coming up with the next computing product to do with the computer what the iPhone is doing to cell phones. They haven't topped the switch to Intel chips. They are still riding that wave.
Apple could kill the whole hackintosh movement by selling an upgradable desktop mid tower.
I think as the hackintosh movement grows Apple will eventually release more products to appease those lost customers. Why buy a $2000 iMac when you can have a faster better machine for $800?
And one that has better hardware inside with better updatability?
Hackintosh movement is not going away.......as a matter of fact I think it is growing!!

Geekdad

Tallest Skil:

"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse" "The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."

I think you guys are all missing the point. There are hundreds of thousands of people installing Mac OS X on non Apple hardware. You can go to numerous sites and get tutorials on how to install Leopard and Snow Leopard on various non Apple Hardware. There is a grass roots movement to install it then others willing to lend support.
I buy Apple products and have been for a very long time. I work in the IT industry and Windows keeps me employed but I love Mac OS X and install it on my home built computer that cost me about $800 to build and install Snow Leopard. I buy a separate license for each and every installation as well.
This home built computer would cost 3 to 4 THOUSAND dollars for a comparable MacPro.
I am very pro Apple and buy their products whenever I can. In my household we have 2 iPhone 3Gs and 3 Apple laptops. I am writing this on a unibody Macbook Pro. I love it!
All this discussion about installing Mac OS X on on non Apple harware reminds me of other platforms like VCRs first came out. The TV and movie industry tried to make it illegal to record movies. But the public won and we are all better for it. If the tv and movie industry won there would be no TiVo. The music industry tried to make illegal to record music onto a cassette! Remember those days?? They even tried to prevent people from owning a DVD recorder! But in all of these instances the public won. Eventually the public will win and Mac OS X will be installable and supported on non Apple hardware.
Apple is not going out and suing and shutting down the thousands of sites helping people install Mac OS X on their home computers. They know that the majority of peoeple that do that also buys regular Apple products.
I find it extremely interesting that so may here are against installing OS X on non Apple hardware.
Or are against Pystar selling computers with Mac OS X already installed.
It smacks of a elitism you only find with people willing to spend more money to keep themselves in a upper class minority so to speak.
Just think how the computing world be different id Microsoft or IBM had kept the early computer and operating systems platforms "closed". The computing world would be so different today!!!!
Well anyway that is just humble opinion!!!! You don't have to agree but you have to admitt I made some good points!!!
Geekdad

It is interesting to read so many posts from people who appear to have absolutely no clue about why actually Apple has the commercial success it is currently enjoying ('closed' ecosystem and all...), and on top of that think that what *geeks* like is liked by everyone else.

This is where I think you are wrong. The Hackintosh movement is not obscure or a minority anymore. It growing by leaps and bounds. Google it and you will find tons of how to articles and websites where people are willing to help you install OS X.
And one that has better hardware inside with better updatability?
Hackintosh movement is not going away.......as a matter of fact I think it is growing!!

Geekdad

It's growing in enthusiast circles on th net. It is patently ridiculous to assume the average user (i.e., the bulk of Apple's market) is going to start messing around with getting OS X to work on generic PCs and read up on it and go to the trouble of involving themselves in the process. The very reason people are turning to Apple is to avoid all of that! The whole trend is toward simplifying and eliminating learning curves and offering a turn-key solution to everything. Please. The consumers that make up the bulk of Apple's market (who don't post on AI and MR, by the way) don't even know what a "hackintosh" is, much less even care about playing around with one.

Consumers who are lining up to pay a nice premium for Apple's hardware - despite the existence and clear marketing of lower-cost solutions that purportedly offer more value, and in a recession, are not going to jump at the idea of tinkering with a low-cost generic PC in order to save a few bucks. Apple's record quarters are achieved by consumers ready and willing to spend the money. The hackintosh phenomenon isn't even on the radar in the actual market. It's a novelty at best.

It was nearly the same with the Windows skinning community. A burgeoning community on the net, with entire websites dedicated to it, but with only a very minor representation in reality. Outside of Deviantart and Wincustomize, no one gave a damn about it.

I am not arguing with you guys about who the average person is that buys a Apple computer. The points you make about those people are valid and correct. No where did I say otherwise. Apple is picking up more and more market share all the time.
But to keep the margins they are getting used to and to pick up more market share they will have to do something to their product line. They can only make a laptop or an iMac so thin before people start to realize they can buy something cheaper that has the same hardware specs and install Mac OS X on it themselves.
I realize that is NOT the majority of the Apple consumers but more of the "geek" segment that wants to have the fastest machine they can get their hands on. But that segment the "geek" or "gamer" is the segment the drives the advances in hardware. Not the average consumer. The computer from 3 years ago is plenty fast enough for them. Who do you think keeps AMD alive and kicking?
The segment of computer buyers that drive advances in hardware and software are also the "Hackintosh" segment! As Apple grows and they gain more market share the will have to deliver a product to appease that segment. Eventually it will as easy to install Mac OS X on non Apple hardware as any other operating system. It will be so easy as point and click....
Anyway I am not going to argue with you as we both bring up good valid points. Those points just happen to be a little different! :-) Have a great weekend!
Geekdad

Tallest Skil:

"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse" "The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."

God I am getting so tired of all you geeks. What is is it with you guys? I think it's great that you can build a whole computer with just a soldering iron and some gaffa tape. I think it's great that all your friends do it too. And it's great that you can find little DIY geek havens all over the interwebs. But for crying out loud... try and remember that there are about a billion computer users out there who have never even seen the inside of their machine.,, and simply don't give a shit about all the geek techy stuff.

Sorry. Sometimes the truth hurts. \

Quote:

You don't have to agree but you have to admitt I made some good points!!!

I think all the people that talk about how Apple will eventually have to open up the OS are missing something. Basically the reason Apple opposes something like Psystar is the same reason that they bring all those suits about trademark infringement. If you don't fight it, you lose it.

Look at it like this: Apple doesn't give a crap about someone buying PC parts to build a computer, and finding tutorials on the web on how to install OS X on it. Their attitude is probably, "Knock yourself out. But you are ON YOUR OWN, and will get NO SUPPORT FROM APPLE." And someone who does this knows they can't expect Apple to support them, because they have half a brain.

But when a company starts selling computers pre-installed with OS X and selling them as Macs, Apple has to fight it. Why? Because if they don't, eventually some retard will get a lawyer and sue because Apple is "not supporting their OS on my computer, and by not litigating against the seller of said computer, they loose their right to deny support". So, you say to yourself, why doesn't Apple just SAY, "You can sell computers with OS X but will not get support from Apple"? Well, because saying that would make Apple liable, and the retards lawyer could argue that Apple by ALLOWING a company to build computers with OS X and selling them means that they are now REQUIRED to support the OS on those computers, despite what the license says. Don't believe it? Then look at what Psystar is doing. They are saying that Apple should allow them to sell computers with OS X installed, despite what the license says. This just leads to the slippery slope where sooner or later Apple would need to support the OS because it's Apple's OS. And what does Apple get in return? Cannibalization of their hardware sales, and dissatisfaction from a growing pool of users of cheap hardware where the OS doesn't "just work".

I buy Apple products and have been for a very long time. I work in the IT industry and Windows keeps me employed but I love Mac OS X and install it on my home built computer that cost me about $800 to build and install Snow Leopard. I buy a separate license for each and every installation as well.

Except that it costs Apple more than $129 per copy of MacOS X to develop it. So congratulations, you ripped Apple off for each home-built PC you bought instead of a Mac.

I think all the people that talk about how Apple will eventually have to open up the OS are missing something. Basically the reason Apple opposes something like Psystar is the same reason that they bring all those suits about trademark infringement. If you don't fight it, you lose it.

Look at it like this: Apple doesn't give a crap about someone buying PC parts to build a computer, and finding tutorials on the web on how to install OS X on it. Their attitude is probably, "Knock yourself out. But you are ON YOUR OWN, and will get NO SUPPORT FROM APPLE." And someone who does this knows they can't expect Apple to support them, because they have half a brain.

But when a company starts selling computers pre-installed with OS X and selling them as Macs, Apple has to fight it. Why? Because if they don't, eventually some retard will get a lawyer and sue because Apple is "not supporting their OS on my computer, and by not litigating against the seller of said computer, they loose their right to deny support". So, you say to yourself, why doesn't Apple just SAY, "You can sell computers with OS X but will not get support from Apple"? Well, because saying that would make Apple liable, and the retards lawyer could argue that Apple by ALLOWING a company to build computers with OS X and selling them means that they are now REQUIRED to support the OS on those computers, despite what the license says. Don't believe it? Then look at what Psystar is doing. They are saying that Apple should allow them to sell computers with OS X installed, despite what the license says. This just leads to the slippery slope where sooner or later Apple would need to support the OS because it's Apple's OS. And what does Apple get in return? Cannibalization of their hardware sales, and dissatisfaction from a growing pool of users of cheap hardware where the OS doesn't "just work".

Have you or do you recorded TV? Ever copy a VHS tape or DVD? Ever record music from the radio...ever done these things? Then at one time those things were and still are very illegal read the license when you buy music or watch TV. Have you ever made a backup copy or a music CD?
All those thing go against a license from the music distributor and the artists rights.
You guys amaze me......you do the same things you condemn others for doing.
Psystar will lose in court....probably. But you have to applaud that they are willing to take a stand against one of the big corporations.
Eventually Apple will have to offer more products to meet those needs that they are not filling now.
Mainstream everyday computer users buy most of the computers in this world but do NOTHING to drive innovation. They are easy to appease just wrap it in a pretty package and you are satisfied. Most of you sheep that buy computers use about 20 percent of the computing power on that nice new shiny computer you bought. It will handle email and web browsing just fine. But if you were the whole computer market then there would be no need for anything faster than what we had 3 years ago!!! Get a clue! It is the gamers and geeks that drive computer and IT in general to get better faster smaller and CHEAPER.
If you were the only market out there then Intel would have stopped making anything faster than a Pentium 4. You would still be using Dial up for internet access because all the ISPs would not need to make a faster infrastructure because no one would be demanding it.
Don't take all the advantages you have now for granted. If it wasn't for the gamer and geeks you would have the computing power and hardware innovations you have now they drive the hardware market.
So call all the names you want be tired of all the geeks but you mainstreamers do not drive the market as much as you think!

Done with this thread. It does no good to argue with the uninformed.
Geekdad

Tallest Skil:

"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse" "The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."

So I bought a license for $129 per installation so how did I rip Apple off????
Well actually I always buy the family pak.....
So explain it to me.....

It's the same as if you were to buy an "upgrade" version of Windows for a PC you built from scratch. And then using a Windows disk from another PC you have (or a friends PC) to get it to load.

When Adobe was selling Photoshop, a full version cost about $600. But if you had purchased a previous full version, it will only cost you $200 to upgrade it to the newer full version. That's because you are upgrading a previous Photoshop license.

The retail OSX is sold for the benefit of Mac users to upgrade the OS license that came when they purchased their Mac. Even if they bought a used Mac off eBay. The OS license is transfered with the Mac even if the you didn't get the disc it was on. And even if there was no OS in the Mac when you bought it, you have a previous Apple OS license. And are entitle to load the retail OSX (providing it will run on your Mac).

A Hackintosh had no previous OSX license. And therefore not entitled to the retail OSX license.

This has been explained many times before by many different people on this forum.

Have you or do you recorded TV? Ever copy a VHS tape or DVD? Ever record music from the radio...ever done these things? Then at one time those things were and still are very illegal read the license when you buy music or watch TV. Have you ever made a backup copy or a music CD?
All those thing go against a license from the music distributor and the artists rights.

Sure we have. But we don't run a business behind it.

You guys amaze me......you do the same things you condemn others for doing.

Psystar will lose in court....probably. But you have to applaud that they are willing to take a stand against one of the big corporations.

"Taking a stand" for the hell of it, or for dubious reasons is hardly praiseworthy. It's downright destructive.

Eventually Apple will have to offer more products to meet those needs that they are not filling now.

No they won't. They certainly can, but they don't have to. No market evidence whatsoever for this. Psystar certainly isn't getting rich off their Mac knock-offs. Consumers vote with their wallets. Judging by that, their needs are being met by Apple just fine. In a recession, even. And in the presence of lower-cost alternatives.

Mainstream everyday computer users buy most of the computers in this world but do NOTHING to drive innovation.

They do. The need for increasing ease and simplicity drives innovation. Hence, the iPhone. In fact, the entire Mac + OS X paradigm is, and has always been, built on simplicity and ease of use. Anything that furthers this ideal is innovative, whether entirely new, or better-implemented. And "innovation" is also a self-fulfilling prophecy, thanks to competition. It is not driven solely by consumer demand.

They are easy to appease just wrap it in a pretty package and you are satisfied.

That pretty package has to work right. It's one thing to assume the average user's needs are more easily met by Apple, but it's an entirely different thing to assume they're stupid and would stick with something that doesn't work.

Most of you sheep that buy computers use about 20 percent of the computing power on that nice new shiny computer you bought.

1080p content can stress the cpu to around 70%. It takes a decent amount of computing power to play flawless HD content, for example. My newsreader alone (NetNewsWire) takes 25%. Just open a bunch of apps and leave them open. If things still run smoothly, that's "computing power."

It will handle email and web browsing just fine. But if you were the whole computer market then there would be no need for anything faster than what we had 3 years ago!!! Get a clue! It is the gamers and geeks that drive computer and IT in general to get better faster smaller and CHEAPER.
If you were the only market out there then Intel would have stopped making anything faster than a Pentium 4. You would still be using Dial up for internet access because all the ISPs would not need to make a faster infrastructure because no one would be demanding it.

Don't overestimate market demand. Moore's Law is a self-fulfilling prophecy. We're at the point now where market competitors tend to also drive each other, often irrespective of actual consumer demand.

Don't take all the advantages you have now for granted. If it wasn't for the gamer and geeks you would have the computing power and hardware innovations you have now they drive the hardware market.

See above.

So call all the names you want be tired of all the geeks but you mainstreamers do not drive the market as much as you think!